Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
|History=This was the original formulation of the second law proposed by Barseghyan in [[Barseghyan (2015)|''The Laws of Scientific Change'']]. [[Scientonomy Seminar|Seminar]] discussions revealed the law's two major flaws. First, it didn't clearly indicate what happened to a theory when a certain [[Theory Assessment Outcomes|assessment outcome]] obtained. Specifically, it didn't link theory assessment outcomes to the theory's acceptance or unacceptance. Secondly, the law sounded like a tautology which is not what a good law should sound like. Consequently, in 2017, a new formulation of the law was suggested by Patton, Overgaard and Barseghyan, which became accepted towards the end of that year and, thus, replaced the initial formulation.[[CiteRef::Patton, Overgaard, and Barseghyan (2017)]]
|Page Status=Needs Editing
|Editor Notes=The prehistory section is too broad; it . It gives a general prehistory of the TOPIC, rather than a prehistory of the THEORY. This section should credit only those philosophers who understood the contextual nature of theory evaluation, i.e. that theories are being evaluated by the method OF THE TIME.
}}
{{Acceptance Record

Navigation menu